3 police officers dead, 4th on life support, suspect killed after traffic stop in California

I can't believe bystanders were taunting police after the shooting. What lowlifes. Would these people rather live in a community without law enforcement? Sure, there is corruption and police brutality, but decent police need and deserve the support of the community.

My cousin is a police officer in Sydney and he tells me of the stress of knowing that every time he walks up to a car with a driver in it, he may be shot dead or have to shoot to save himself. He tells me of all the thankless jobs they do -- examining murder and accident scenes, having to tell someone a loved one is dead, dealing with junkies and so on and so on - and then hearing people call him and his colleagues "pigs."

Well, honest police on the beat get a big thank you from me. It sure beats the hell out of whatever is in second place.

And to those jerks in Oakland who taunted the police: just remember that next time the mad ax killer is running loose in your garden.

Would these people rather live in a community without law enforcement?

If you consider the neighborhood that incident probably took place in, the answer is probably yes.

If only those bystanders had been armed with guns as well as the police officers, then I am sure the body count would have been much lower. /sarcasm off.

"A group of Oakland ministers went to the hospital to offer prayers and condolences to the family members of the injured officers and the dozens of Oakland police officers who gathered there."

Shouldn't they be offering condolences to the DEAD officers and not the 'injured', as the article reads?

Anyway, this is very sad on so many levels. What a thankless job, being a police officer, and then having these unbelievable people taunting the police and probably hailing the gunman as some kind of hero! I can understand being upset about the shooting of the unarmed man last winter, and I hope that if there's sufficient evidence to find the man was guilty of murder (ie. did it knowingly and with prejudice) then he is found as such. It doesn't mean you go taunting the police, particularly when three of their own have been cut down by a mad man.

The police murder of Oscar Grant is still hanging over Oakland, as one respondent said. That no doubt accounts for the taunts. The taunts represent a well-earned fear that cops in America can get away with murder and other human rights abuses. It does not make the taunting right, of course.

No police officer I know do any "thankless tasks" they are all thanked in the traditional way at the end of the month with money into their bank accounts and pension funds..generous money. Personally i am a friend of the police..but that's with the assumption all Police are straight. There is nothing worse in life than a bent policeman.

Is it me, or is there a police car chase, shoot out, or man-hunt happening every 10 seconds in the US? I realize that this was a particularly bad one because officers died, but somewhere in the US, this type of thing is always happening... just look those tv shows that "catch it all" on tape. I for one am feeling pretty safe here in Japan where it's still not 100% safe, but better than knowing your neighbor could be carrying a gun on him wherever he goes.

Bento: "There is nothing worse in life than a bent policeman."

Show me where these men were 'bent' and I'll perhaps agree that they deserved to be taunted after death and what not. Getting money for a job does not mean that it is not thankless, my friend. Anyway, yes, there are some bad officers out there, and they are as bad as if not worse than many criminals out there, but that's neither here nor there on this thread.

This has nothing to do with this terrible case, but the idea that police work is thankless is bogus. If it was there would no police, or people would have to be drafted into the police force. If anyone know of a police officer who has gone on record as saying that his or her work is thankless I would like to hear about it. In most places police jobs are highly competitive.

With that out of the way, getting killed is an occupational hazard of police work, but probably less so than construction work; it is far safer than going into combat.

This is an especially terrible case because the police as far as well did nothing to provoke the killer's attacks on them. The killer was a con on parole who had somehow managed to arm himself with two weapons, including an assault rifle, which he knew how to use with deadly force. How he managed to get his weapons will eventually be revealed but what was on his mind when he shot the officers we'll never know. Did he imagine that he could stand off a whole SWAT team?

The one thing that this matter makes clear is that it is way too easy for sickos to get assault weapons in the US. Living in a country like Japan you forget just how violent the United States is.

the idea that police work is thankless is bogus

In the sense that the police do get paid (of course) and that most law-abiding citizens are glad to have them around, then yes it's bogus. In the sense that the people police officers come into contact most tend to be the very people who do not appreciate their efforts (ie the dross of society, the criminal elements, the lowlifes), I'm sure there are times when it can seem pretty thankless.

If anyone know of a police officer who has gone on record as saying that his or her work is thankless I would like to hear about it.

You won't hear it from a serving officer, because voicing such an opinion publicly would be professional suicide. Quite a few of those who have left before retirement will tell you one of the reasons they left was that they felt the work was thankless.

My cousin works in the area for the police, and I was relieved when I found out that he is ok.

It is indeed sad that residents in the area were taunting the police. Having visitied and grew up in some areas similar, all I can say to the people is if you want to lessen the police shootings, and bad cops on the job, then stop taking an attitude of "F*** the police" and start to led a hand (i.e. repoting who is doing the crimes and not adhering to that silly "Stop Snitching" crap). True there are some bad cops on the job, but by and large most are just working class people who want to come home at the end of the day doing the things that many of us will not do in regards to putting our lives on the line for others. I bet youi if you polled any in that crowd as to what they would have done if they were cops, and someone started shooting at them they would have responded that they would have shot to make sure they protect themselves.

Police corruption occurs when good cops see time after time how fruitless their work may seem. Arresting the same people, who are making big money doing illegal things while they are putting their lives on the line for small amounts compared to what some street dealers are making. It is probably only human nature that some will feel tempted to take some matters in their own hands. But when you look at a majority of those cases, you will see that the people that they really do wrong to are the ones that basically are the criminal element. In and out of the revolving door of the American Justice system. That does not make it right, but by and large I think that the cops are donig a tough job and deserve a bit more respect than those bystanders were showing.

If they don't want cops shooting first, then stop shooting at themselves, and take some of the edge off the streets.

My prayers go to the family of the slain officers and the ones that are still in the hospital.

Just wait until tomorrow, and you will see the likes of of Sharpton and Jackson out there. What they should be doing is asking why does this parolee still have a gun, and what are the people in the neighborhood going to do to stop the violence.

Okay, latest news is that a fourth policeman, Officer Hege, has died in hospital. This news from Yahoo: "Reached by telephone late Saturday, Dr. John S. Hege said his son loved being a policeman and recently became a motorcycle traffic patrol officer. 'He liked excitement,' he said. He obviously did not see his job as thankless.

Many lives were lost, and this is a shame. In my book all life is important and the lose of one is tragic. No one life holds more value than the other. May the families find peace and remember the good of all the victims.

Police said Mixon wielded two different weapons, one an assault rifle. One gun was used at the first scene and another at the apartment building where he was hiding.

Could someone tell me why we do not need gun control?

Guns do not kill, people holding guns kill.

NRA, working for the gun makers.........

I was stopped a few months ago for the first time in my life. Two police vehicles followed me half a rural block. One cop on the passenger's side had a gun pointed at me while the officer outside my window asked for my license, registration, and proof of insurance. I knew not to reach for them before being asked. It was very intimidating but I understand why they need to do that to protect themselves. After all that, they let me off with a warning. And I haven't rolled a stop since....

What a thankless job, being a police officer,

Indeed. They deal with people at their absolute worst day in and day out.

Yahoo updated its story on Officer Hege after I wrote. He is apparently brain dead, poor man.

The point about gun control brought up by JoeBigs is right on the money. The gun industry and the gun lobby are accessories to the fact. Thanks to them guns are as available for the asking as chewing gum in the US.

Incredibly unfortunate I know a lot of police officers God willing this never happens to any of them.

Could someone tell me why we do not need gun control?

Actually Oakland has some of the strictest gun control legislations in California a state which has some of the strictest gun control legislations in the U.S. The weapons weren't registered and, considering assault rifles are prohibited as of the 2000 ban, probably purchased illegaly. The problem with gun bans is that they are incredibly difficult to enforce, they don't prevent people from buying firearms elsewhere, and they fail to take into account illegal weapons sale. They also fail to reduce murder rates in areas where they are enacted, case in point Brady registration law and the fact that after analyzing 51 studies in 2003, the pro-control CDC (Center of Disease Control) admitted that the "evidence was insufficient to determine the effectiveness of any of these [firearms] laws." Personally, I could care less if you had howitzer as long as your not firing it at my house (or during the wee hours of the night). I'm simply stating that U.S bans historically have little or no impact on murder rates (I am assuming that pro-ban people are against the violence commited using them and not anti-gun simply for the sake of being anti-gun, that would just be silly).

What complete scum. It makes you wonder how they made it to that point in their lives without doing something so crazy sooner.

Betzee: One cop on the passenger's side had a gun pointed at me

Uh huh.

JeanColmar: Thanks to them guns are as available for the asking as chewing gum in the US.

I've very anti-gun, but I'm also against other anti-gun people who debate the gun problem with such childish emotion. Your lack of credibility creates collateral damage for the rest of us. Please stop.

The problem with gun bans is that they are incredibly difficult to enforce, they don't prevent people from buying firearms elsewhere

That's because there are too many 'elsewhere's. There needs to be a proper nationwide gun ban. Otherwise all you have is a colander with a couple of holes plugged. It's still going to leak.

I am assuming that pro-ban people are against the violence commited using them and not anti-gun simply for the sake of being anti-gun, that would just be silly

Can't say I see the difference - the whole point of a gun is to commit violence. It's not like you can use one to, say, bake a cake or mow the lawn and just occasionally one might be used to inadvertently kill someone. You press the trigger, a bullet comes out and hits someone. That's what they do, that's what they're made to do. That's the whole point of a gun.

"I'm simply stating that U.S bans historically have little or no impact on murder rates (I am assuming that pro-ban people are against the violence commited using them and not anti-gun simply for the sake of being anti-gun, that would just be silly)."

They tend to be implemented in response to high crime rates involving firearms. So to get a sense of whether they are effective you need to compare communities with similar demographics which opted to ban guns with those that didn't. Say Washington and Baltimore (where crime rates are about the same despite different gun laws).

I think there are better ways to address the problem. Four out of five guns used in the commission of a crime in NYC, for example, were purchased south of the Mason-Dixon Line. So NY's stricter licensing requirements don't do much to protect its residents given the ease with which firearms can be purchased elsewhere.

Guns have also given you freedom cleo. They also protected settlers from wild animals and highway robbery. There is good and bad in everything. This is one bad thing you hear about. You never hear about the guns that save people. Mixon is dead and I'm glad he was not taken into custody after doing what he did to 4 men who risk their lives to use guns for good.

Guns have also given you freedom cleo

Would you like to explain how exactly? I'm not a 'settler', I don't live anywhere where highway robbery is a problem.....No way any US cop (for all that I'm sure they do a great job under difficult conditions) does anything to protect my donkey.

I find it hilarious when gun supporters start bringing the frontier spirit and the US constitution into the debate.

You guys need to look at your calendars, this is 2009, not 1809.

bushlover at 09:58 AM JST - 23rd March Guns have also given you freedom cleo. They also protected settlers from wild animals and highway robbery.

Yes next time I get on my horse and go get some milk at 7-11 I will remember my colt 45. You never know when Jesse James will stick me up for my cash!

bushlover at 09:58 AM JST - 23rd March This is one bad thing you hear about.

Over and over and over and over and over again. Now I forget, this year alone how many people have been murdered by a gun?

bushlover at 09:58 AM JST - 23rd March You never hear about the guns that save people.

Ah if you would not mind, please do inform us as to how many have been saved by guns?

I am not talking about police officers using his gun. I am talking about any civie who stopped a crime by using his/her gun. Got any information on this?

bushlover at 09:58 AM JST - 23rd March Mixon is dead and I'm glad he was not taken into custody after doing what he did to 4 men who risk their lives to use guns for good.

So your into street executions? Now I understand why you made the wild west comment...Do you live near a water tower and have an AR15?

That's because there are too many 'elsewhere's. There needs to be a proper nationwide gun ban. Otherwise all you have is a colander with a couple of holes plugged. It's still going to leak.

But that won't answer the millions of privetly owned firearms that will go 'missing' or be 'stolen' from homes or for the hundreds of thousands of unregistered weapons, blackmarket firearms, and the dozens of state militias that would be, quite literaly, up in arms. I can't even speculate how such a feat of civilian disarmerment could be achieved in the U.S , it would take years and it would be riddled with dozens if not hundreds of very unpleasent 'incidents' not unlike this article.

Can't say I see the difference - the whole point of a gun is to commit violence. It's not like you can use one to, say, bake a cake or mow the lawn and just occasionally one might be used to inadvertently kill someone. You press the trigger, a bullet comes out and hits someone. That's what they do, that's what they're made to do. That's the whole point of a gun.

True enough, but there are those who collect them for historical purposes or buy them simply for the sake of having one. These may be the exceptions that prove the principle but they are exceptions nonetheless. In addition there are the innumerable hunters in the U.S and, despite whatever ideas you may have about the practice, firearms are the most inexpensive route one can take when hunting game (A box of 22 rounds is about the same cost as a quality hunting arrowhead which may or may not break after a handful of uses).

But that won't answer the millions of privetly owned firearms that will go 'missing' or be 'stolen' from homes or for the hundreds of thousands of unregistered weapons, blackmarket firearms, and the dozens of state militias that would be, quite literaly, up in arms.

So laws shouldn't be enacted because the criminals object to the laws? If you're intent on having your gun no matter what you can come up with any number of buts, but the bottom line is you'll never stop people shooting each other if you don't get rid of the guns. So it will take years to do. Fine. All the more reason to start now instead of prevaricating while still more cops doing their jobs get shot at and still more little kids accidentally shoot themselves with Daddy's pistol that he forgot to unload and put away.

there are those who collect them for historical purposes or buy them simply for the sake of having one.

One of the lamest buts going. People aren't allowed to keep Komodor Dragons on their lawn 'just for the sake of it' or set up their own nuclear reactors 'just for the sake of it' or distill sarin gas in their kitchens 'just for the sake of it'- why should they be allowed to own dangerous weapons 'just for the sake of it'? Surely public safety trumps 'but ah wanna'?

So laws shouldn't be enacted because the criminals object to the laws? If you're intent on having your gun no matter what you can come up with any number of buts, but the bottom line is you'll never stop people shooting each other if you don't get rid of the guns. So it will take years to do. Fine. All the more reason to start now instead of prevaricating while still more cops doing their jobs get shot at and still more little kids accidentally shoot themselves with Daddy's pistol that he forgot to unload and put away.

For starters I don't own a firearm. I'm merely stating that any effort to remove them from the American equation is doomed to failure DUE to the now criminals and the people that would refuse to surrender them due to bravado or ideology. But as of right now they are not criminal so technically I'm saying that gun control laws shouldn't be enacted because citizens object to them, and govenrment is (should anyway) the voice of the people afterall.

One of the lamest buts going. People aren't allowed to keep Komodor Dragons on their lawn 'just for the sake of it' or set up their own nuclear reactors 'just for the sake of it' or distill sarin gas in their kitchens 'just for the sake of it'- why should they be allowed to own dangerous weapons 'just for the sake of it'? Surely public safety trumps 'but ah wanna'?

Actually all of those can be done by privet entities (Bruce Power Company is getting the paperwork done to build their own Nuclear Reactor in Nanticoke) you just need the proper papers. And sarin gas is only slightly different than most commercial insecticides. Come to think of it there are very few things you CAN'T get in the U.S, military grade explosives, for example, are covered under Explosive Licensing Chapter 296-52 - Part B.

May the NRA burn in hell! The NRA does not care about you nor about me! 3 dead Oakland cops, sure the NRA is thinking this will scare more Americans in to buying more and more GUNS and more and more $$$$ for the NRA! RIP Okland cops! Burn in hell NRA!

all of those can be done by privet entities

But not by private individuals.

If on the other hand you're claiming that Mr Joe Average American demands the ability to shoot/radiate/gas/poison/blow up his neighbours or passers-by just coz he can, then I throw in the towel. You're telling me the whole country is stark raving mad.

The state of North Dakota (2006 pop. 640,000) is full of guns.

Over half the population own a firearm.

Not one single gun-related death last year, though there were two deaths by stabbing.

The city of Oakland is home to about 400, 000, and saw 127 homicides in 2007, with 90 percent involving guns.

http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandhomicides/ci_9344423

What a low-life scumbag.

I don't believe in banning guns, but there is absolutely no need for any normal law-abiding person in the world to own an assault rifle.

But not by private individuals.

Private entity can refer to one or many individuals, its easier for large entities to finish the hundreds of thousands of written forms and to put forward the capital to finance large projects but it is possible for individuals to do these things, if they wanted to dedicate years of their lives to the cause that is.

If on the other hand you're claiming that Mr Joe Average American demands the ability to shoot/radiate/gas/poison/blow up his neighbours or passers-by just coz he can, then I throw in the towel. You're telling me the whole country is stark raving mad.

Can't you see the beauty of it? Iran spits in the face of the nuclear west. Why? Because it can. Tibetan monks fling themselves at chinese police. Why? Because they can. The world is a place that teeters on insanity simply because it doesn't know any better and you find these acts of self destructive tendencies odd?

Normal law abiding people don't have a need for an assault rifle. I agree on that unless they are some kind of collector. But then again it's not the law abiding ones that murder. If you take guns away from the criminals they will just resort to other weapons.